Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Should Pediatric Euthanasia Be Legalized? Marije Brouwer, MA,a, b Christopher Kaczor, PhD, c Margaret P. Battin, MFA, PhD, d ShouldEls Maeckelberghe, PhD, Pediatric a John D. Lantos, MD, e Eduard Euthanasia Verhagen, MD, JD, PhDb be Legalized? abstract Voluntary active euthanasia for adults at their explicit request has been legal in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2002. In those countries, acceptance of the practice for adults has been followed by acceptance of the practice for children. Opponents of euthanasia see this as a dangerous slippery slope. Proponents argue that euthanasia is sometimes ethically appropriate for minors and that, with proper safeguards, it should be legally available in appropriate circumstances for patients at any age. In this Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, to discuss the ethics of legalizing euthanasia for children. Voluntary active euthanasia for to discuss the ethics of legalizing adults at their explicit request euthanasia for children. aInstitute for Medical Education and bDepartment of Pediatrics, University Medical Center Groningen, University has been legal in Belgium1 and the THE CASE of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; cDepartment of Netherlands since 2002. Euthanasia, Philosophy, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, voluntary or nonvoluntary, remains California; dDepartment of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah; and eChildren’s Mercy Hospital, Kansas illegal in the United States, although Adults and children of 12 years of City, Missouri several states have legalized age and older can legally request physician-assisted aid in dying for euthanasia in the Netherlands under All authors contributed to the design of this article, the drafting of the manuscript, and the review of adults. No US state permits assisted the 2002 Euthanasia Law. Requests for the manuscript and approved the final version. dying or euthanasia for minors. euthanasia often come from patients DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1542/ peds. 2017- 1343 Opponents of assisted suicide and experiencing unbearable suffering euthanasia often claim that the with no prospect of improvement. Accepted for publication Apr 25, 2017 legalization of such practices for Their requests must be made earnestly Address correspondence to John D. Lantos, MD, competent adults will begin a slide and with full conviction and are only Children’s Mercy Hospital, 2401 Gillham Rd, Kansas City, MO 64108. E-mail: [email protected] down a slippery slope, leading to the honored if patients and their doctors legalization of voluntary euthanasia see euthanasia as the only escape PEDIATRICS (ISSN Numbers: Print, 0031-4005; Online, 1098-4275). or physician-assisted death for from the situation. Acts of euthanasia patients who cannot consent. are reported to the Ministry of Health Copyright © 2018 by the American Academy of Pediatrics In Belgium and the Netherlands, and are reviewed to ensure that they comply with the law. In addition, since FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have acceptance of the practice in adults indicated they have no financial relationships has been followed by acceptance of 2005, neonatal euthanasia for infants relevant to this article to disclose. <1 year of age has been permitted by the practice for children. But is that FUNDING: No external funding. a slippery slope, and is it necessarily a policy known as the 2005 Groningen Protocol. POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors a bad thing? Proponents argue that have indicated they have no potential conflicts of euthanasia is sometimes ethically In the past 10 years, 2 cases of interest to disclose. appropriate and that, with proper neonatal euthanasia were reported, safeguards, access to it should not be and in the last 15 years, 7 cases of To cite: Brouwer M, Kaczor C, Battin MP, et al. limited by age. Others disagree. In this euthanasia in minors between 12 and Should Pediatric Euthanasia be Legalized?. Pedi­ Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers 18 years old have been reported. The atrics. 2018;141(2):e20171343 from the United States and the majority of cases concerned children Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, with terminal cancer. All cases were Downloaded from www.aappublications.org/news by guest on September 28, 2021 PEDIATRICS Volume 141, number 2, February 2018:e20171343 ETHICS ROUNDS retrospectively assessed by a but certain side effect. Although it the end of life, especially those who multidisciplinary review committee is true that increasing the dosage choose not to kill themselves. and considered appropriate. Nobody of the sedatives may be necessary “ ” was prosecuted. over time to continue to relieve Moreover, euthanasia is not properly suffering, relieving suffering in this Dutch pediatricians and several described as relieving suffering. way is ethically permissible, even parent groups have argued that A suffering person who is relieved if death as a side effect occurs. (For severely ill children between 1 and of suffering is in a position to more on why this distinction is 12 years of age and their families are ’ experience the relief of suffering. But legally and ethically important, see denied access to the same provisions Euthanasia Examined a person who is killed is dead, and the legal philosopher John Keown s as newborns and older children so such a person no longer has any , Cambridge without good reason. They suggest bodily experiences. The corpse of a University Press.) reevaluation of the current legal person who has been killed neither situation and propose to extend the All people of good will agree that we feels pain nor the relief of the pain. A newborn regulation to all children should alleviate suffering. It is the corpse feels nothing. Indeed, human who are 1 to 12 years of age. The legalization of euthanasia and its beings who are killed no longer exist Minister of Health is considering expansion to new classes of persons, at all, so euthanasia does not relieve transformation of these propositions not its criminalization, that hampers their suffering. into new regulation. achieving this goal. If we kill patients You are asked to advise the Minister rather than relieving their pain, the Moreover, most philosophers draw practice of euthanasia undermines of Health. What advice would you ’ an important distinction between the practice of palliative care. Why Christophergive? Kaczor, PhD, Comments voluntary and nonvoluntary worry about alleviating someone s euthanasia. In voluntary euthanasia, pain, when we can simply kill the a competent patient chooses to die on person? The more people who the basis of his or her own evaluation I would advise the Minister of Health choose euthanasia and the more of his or her life. In nonvoluntary not to expand the range of cases in euthanasia is nonvoluntarily imposed euthanasia, no such consent is which intentional killing of innocent on patients, the less incentive given. Children <12 years of age are human beings is permitted by law. there is to improve methods of incapable of giving informed consent Defenders of the Dutch law palliative care. The more physicians for meaningful life decisions. For this permitting intentional killing practice euthanasia, the less these reason, we do not permit children of infants as well as adults and physicians practice relieving pain. <12 years of age to consent to their children 12 years of age and older The more people there are who “ own sterilization, to vote in elections, presuppose an empirical claim: die of euthanasia, the fewer people to join the military, to get married, ” ’ killing a person is the only escape there will be who demand greater or to have sexual intercourse. The from the situation of unbearable palliative care. If demand for choice to end one s own life or ’ suffering. This claim is false. Terminal palliative care is dampened, there is to authorize another person to sedation is a contemporary technique less financial incentive for developing end one s own life is much more of palliative care in which a person new methods of alleviating pain. The serious than the choice to join the who was suffering is relieved of pain more euthanasia is expanded, the military, to get married, or to have entirely by the continuous infusion less pressure there will be to improve sexual intercourse because those ’ of sedatives that entirely relieve palliative care, because killing will be decisions can be reversed and do not all pain. Terminal sedation can be seen as a simpler, cheaper option. completely change an individual s administered to infants, children, or Perhaps worst of all, expanding life in every respect. Current Dutch adults who are suffering and cannot the scope of legalized euthanasia law does allow for nonvoluntary be cured of their disease. If we care undermines compassion for those euthanasia of infants, an allowance about suffering people, let us relieve “ who suffer. Some people will think, incompatible with the principles of their suffering rather than killing or even say, Euthanasia is legal, justice because such infants do not them. but this person did not choose it. consent to have their lives ended. If Eventually, terminal sedation leads If she is refusing euthanasia and is all persons are to have equal rights to death. Over time, the dosage of choosing to suffer rather than die, and deserve equal protection of the that is her problem. Why should we law, then disabled persons (whether sedatives must be increased. At a ” certain point, the dosage may be so help her when she is not even helping they are infants, children, or adults) high that the death of the patient herself? Legalizing euthanasia deserve the same basic protections may be foreseen as an unintended endangers and undermines those at from intentional homicide. Downloaded from www.aappublications.org/news by guest on September 28, 2021 2 BROUWER et al Margaret P. Battin, PhD, Comments That allowing this practice would understanding, and the willingness lead to wholesale killing of children to help someone who wishes to avoid My Dear Minister of Health, 1 to 12 years of age.
Recommended publications
  • Physician-Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia: Some Relevant Differences John Deigh
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 88 Article 14 Issue 3 Spring Spring 1998 Physician-Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia: Some Relevant Differences John Deigh Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation John Deigh, Physician-Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia: Some Relevant Differences, 88 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 1155 (Spring 1998) This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/98/8803-1155 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW& CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 88, No. 3 Copyright 0 1998 by Northwestern University, School of Law Prinfd in U.SA. PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE AND VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA: SOME RELEVANT DIFFERENCES JOHN DEIGH" Yale Kamisar, in a series of influential articles on physician- assisted suicide and voluntary active euthanasia, has written elo- quently in opposition to legalizing these practices.1 Today he revisits the first of these articles, his seminal 1958 article, Some Non-Religious Views Against Proposed "Mercy-Killing"Legislation. 2 In that paper Professor Kamisar used the distinction between the law on the books and the law in action to quiet concerns about the harsh consequences of a blanket prohibition on mercy kill- ing. A blanket prohibition, after all, if strictly applied, would impose criminal punishment on physicians and relatives whose complicity in bringing about the death of a patient, or loved one was justified by the dying person's desperate condition and lucid wish to die.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitutional Status of Morals Legislation
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 98 | Issue 1 Article 2 2009 The onsC titutional Status of Morals Legislation John Lawrence Hill Indiana University-Indianapolis Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Right click to open a feedback form in a new tab to let us know how this document benefits you. Recommended Citation Hill, John Lawrence (2009) "The onC stitutional Status of Morals Legislation," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 98 : Iss. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol98/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TKenf]iky Law Jornal VOLUME 98 2009-2010 NUMBER I ARTICLES The Constitutional Status of Morals Legislation John Lawrence Hiff TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. MORALS LEGISLATION AND THE HARM PRINCIPLE A. Some Difficulties with the Concept of "MoralsLegislation" B. The Near Irrelevance of the PhilosophicDebate C. The Concept of "Harm" II. DEFINING THE SCOPE OF THE PRIVACY RIGHT IN THE CONTEXT OF MORALS LEGISLATION III. MORALS LEGISLATION AND THE PROBLEMS OF RATIONAL BASIS REVIEW A. The 'RationalRelation' Test in Context B. The Concept of a Legitimate State Interest IV. MORALITY AS A LEGITIMATE STATE INTEREST: FIVE TYPES OF MORAL PURPOSE A. The Secondary or IndirectPublic Effects of PrivateActivity B. Offensive Conduct C. Preventingthe Corruptionof Moral Character D. ProtectingEssential Values andSocial Institutions E.
    [Show full text]
  • Attitude of Doctors Toward Euthanasia in Delhi, India
    Published online: 2019-04-05 Original Article AAttitudettitude ooff ddoctorsoctors ttowardoward eeuthanasiauthanasia iinn DDelhi,elhi, IIndiandia ABSTRACT Introduction: Deliberation over euthanasia has been enduring for an extended period of time. On one end, there are populaces talking for the sacrosanctity of life and on the other end, there are those, who promote individual independence. All over the world professionals from different areas have already spent mammoth period over the subject. A large number of cases around the world have explored the boundaries of current legal distinctions, drawn between legitimate and nonlegitimate instances of ending the life. The term euthanasia was derived from the Greek words “eu” and “thanatos” which means “good death” or “easy death.” It is also known as mercy killing. Euthanasia literally means putting a person to painless death especially in case of incurable suffering or when life becomes purposeless as a result of mental or physical handicap. Objective: To study the attitude of doctors toward euthanasia in Delhi. Methodology: It was a questionnaire based descriptive cross-sectional study carried out between July 2014 and December 2014. The study population included Doctors from 28 hospitals in Delhi both public and private. Equal numbers of doctors from four specialties were included in this study (50 oncologists, 50 hematologists, 50 psychiatrists, and 50 intensivists). Demographic questionnaire, as well as the Euthanasia Attitude Scale (EAS), a 30 items Likert-scale questionnaire developed by (Holloway, Hayslip and Murdock, 1995) was used to measure attitude toward Euthanasia. The scale uses both positively (16 items) and negatively (14 items) worded statements to control the effect of acquiescence.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Final
    In Pursuit of a Good Death: Responding to Changing Sensibilities in the Context of the Right to Die Debate A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Studies at the University of Sydney VICTORIA HILEY The Faculty of Law University of Sydney January 2008 ABSTRACT This thesis challenges a number of claims that are made in the context of the euthanasia debate: that there is only one version of the good death; that rights discourse is the most appropriate vehicle by which to secure legal recognition of a right to die; that the Netherlands is either a model for reform or the epitome of a slippery slope in its regulation of euthanasia; and that a key argument in the euthanasia debate, the sanctity of life doctrine, is a fixed, immutable concept. In this thesis I use process sociology, developed by Norbert Elias, in order to capture changing sensibilities toward death and dying in the common law jurisdictions (Australia, England, the United States of America, Canada and New Zealand) and in the Netherlands. At the same time I analyse changing attitudes among key groups whose work impacts upon the euthanasia debate namely, parliamentarians, law reform bodies, the judiciary and medical associations. My aim in adopting this approach is threefold. First of all, to examine evolving attitudes to death and dying in order to determine whether the institutions of law and medicine are responding in an adequate manner to changing sensibilities in the common law countries and in the Netherlands. Secondly, to highlight shifting balances of power within the euthanasia debate.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Relationship Between Suicide-Prevention and Suicide-Advocacy Groups
    Letter to the Editor On the Relationship Between Suicide-Prevention and Suicide-Advocacy Groups Margaret Pabst Battin Uniuersity of Utah Largely in response to contemporary medicine's advancing technological capacities to extend the process of dying to extraordinary lengths. recent years have seen the emergence of numerous advocacy groups concerned with what is often called "death with dignity." For instance. the New York-based group. Concern for Dying, distributes the Living Will as a means for individuals to secure their right to refuse unwanted, life-prolonging medical treatment. Another New York group, the Society for the Right to Die, lobbies for passage of "natural death" legislation, and has seen passage of Natural Death Acts in California and ten other U.S. states, and legislative consideration of similar bills in another twenty-seven. The Los Angeles-area group, Hemlock, led by a British writer who helped his cancer-striken wife drink a lethal potion, argues for societal recognition of assisted suicide as an option in terminal illness. Britain's Voluntary Euthanasia Society, once renamed EXIT: The Society for the Right to Die with Dignity, has published and distributed to its members a booklet of suicide methods for use by terminally ill persons; a similar book has become commercially available in France. Nor are such groups a local phenomenon; they are emerging world-wide. Although their views range from quite conservative insistence on passive refusal of treatment to radical suicide-advocacy, there are new voluntary euthanasia societies in Australia, Norway, Sweden, Japan, Denmark, New Zealand, South Africa, Holland, Germany, France, Colombia, Zimbabwe, Canada, India, and Switzerland.
    [Show full text]
  • The Court Upholds a State Law Prohibiting Physician-Assisted Suicide
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 88 Article 3 Issue 3 Spring Spring 1998 The ourC t Upholds A State Law Prohibiting Physician-Assisted Suicide Brett einbF erg Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Brett einbeF rg, The ourC t Upholds A State Law Prohibiting Physician-Assisted Suicide, 88 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 847 (Spring 1998) This Supreme Court Review is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/98/8803-0847 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINALLAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 88, No. 3 Copyrght © 1998 by Northwestern University, School of Law Printed in U.S.A. THE COURT UPHOLDS A STATE LAW PROHIBITING PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE Vacco v. Quill, 117 S. Ct. 2293 (1997) I. INTRODUCTION In Vacco v. Quill,' the United States Supreme Court ad- dressed whether a terminally ill person has a constitutionally protected right to commit suicide with the assistance of a physi- cian.2 The Court held that state laws prohibiting physician- assisted suicide are constitutionally permissible since they do not violate the Equal Protection Clause.3 In making its decision, the Court determined that the right to die with assistance is not a fundamental right.4 The Court
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
    THE RIGHT TO ASSISTED SUICIDE AND EUTHANASIA NEIL M. GORSUCH* I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................ 600 I. THE COURTS ............................................................. 606 A. The Washington Due Process Litigation............ 606 1. The Trial Court ...................... 606 2. The Ninth Circuit Panel Decision ............. 608 3. The En Banc Court ...................................... 609 B. The New York Equal ProtectionLitigation ........ 611 1. The Trial Court ........................................... 611 2. The Second Circuit ..................................... 612 C. The Supreme Court............................................. 613 1. The Majority Opinion ................................. 614 2. The Concurrences ....................................... 616 D. The Consequences ofGlucksberg and Quill .... 619 III. ARGUMENTS FROM HISTORY ................................... 620 A. Which History?................................................... 620 B. The Ancients ....................................................... 623 C. Early Christian Thinkers .................................... 627 D. English Common Law ......................................... 630 E. ColonialAmerican Experience........................... 631 F. The Modern Consensus: Suicide ........................ 633 G. The Modern Consensus: Assisting Suicide and Euthanasia.......................................................... 636 IV. ARGUMENTS FROM FAIRNESS .................................. 641 A . Causation...........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assisted Suicide, the Due Process Clause and "Fidelity in Translation"
    Fordham Law Review Volume 63 Issue 4 Article 11 1995 Assisted Suicide, the Due Process Clause and "Fidelity in Translation" Willard C. Shih Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Willard C. Shih, Assisted Suicide, the Due Process Clause and "Fidelity in Translation", 63 Fordham L. Rev. 1245 (1995). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol63/iss4/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ASSISTED SUICIDE, THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE AND "FIDELITY IN TRANSLATION" WILLARD C. SHIH INTRODUCTION [T]he prospect of impossibility should not dissuade any scientist or doctor who is sincerely dedicated to the pursuit of empirical truth. A prerequisite for that noble aim is the ideal of unfettered experi- mentation on human death under impeccably ethical conditions. [Physician-assisted suicide], as I have outlined it, comes closest to that ideal, now and for the foreseeable future. The practice should be legitimized and implemented as soon as possible; but that calls for the strident advocacy of influential personalities who, unfortu- nately, choose to remain silent or disinterested-or simply antithetical.' Dr. Kevorkian authored this passage hoping that other physicians would read it and join his crusade supporting physician-assisted sui- cide. The mere mention of his name stirs up different images in peo- ple's minds.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Aid in Dying Is NOT Suicide, Assisted Suicide Or Euthanasia
    Medical Aid in Dying Is NOT Suicide, Assisted Suicide or Euthanasia Medical aid in dying is fundamentally stricken with life-ending illnesses. They feel different from euthanasia. While both deeply offended when the medical practice is practices are designed to bring about a referred to as suicide or assisted suicide. peaceful death, the distinction between the two comes down to who administers the means to Leading medical organizations reject that peaceful death. Euthanasia is an intentional the term “physician-assisted suicide.” act by which another person (not the dying The American Academy of Hospice and person) administers the medication. By contrast, Palliative Medicine, American Medical Women’s medical aid in dying requires the patient to be Association, American Medical Student Associa- able to take the medication themselves and tion, American Academy of Family Physicians and therefore always remain in control. Euthanasia is American Public Health Association have all illegal throughout the United States. adopted policies opposing the use of the terms “suicide” and “assisted suicide” to describe the State legislatures and courts in states medical practice of aid in dying. The American where the practice is authorized Association of Suicidology, a nationally recognized recognize medical aid in dying as organization that promotes prevention of suicide differing from suicide, assisted suicide or through research, public awareness programs, euthanasia. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are education and training comprised of respected
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography and Further Reading
    Herring: Medical Law and Ethics, 7th edition Bibliography and Further Reading Aasi, G.-H. (2003) ‘Islamic legal and ethical views on organ transplantation and donation’ Zygon 38: 725. Abdallah, H., Shenfield, F., and Latarche, E. (1998) ‘Statutory information for the children born of oocyte donation in the UK’ Human Reproduction 13: 1106. Abdallah, S., Daar, S., and Khitamy, A. (2001) ‘Islamic Bioethics’ Canadian Medical Association Journal 9: 164. Abortion Law Reform Association (1997) A Report on NHS Abortion Services (ALRA). Abortion Rights (2004) Eroding Women’s Rights to Abortion (Abortion Rights). Abortion Rights (2007) Campaign for a Modern Abortion Law Launched as Poll Confirms Overwhelming Public Support (Abortion Rights). Academy of Medical Sciences (2011) Animals Containing Human Material (Academy of Medical Sciences). ACC (2004) Annual Report (ACC). Ackernman, J. (1998) ‘Assisted suicide, terminal illness, severe disability, and the double standard’ in M. Battin, R. Rhodes, and A. Silvers (eds) Physician Assisted Suicide (Routledge). Action for ME (2005) The Times Reports on Biological Research (Action for ME).Adenitire, J. (2016) ‘A conscience-based human right to be ‘doctor death’’ Public Law 613. Ad Hoc Advisory Group on the Operation of NHS Research Ethics Committees (2005) Report (DoH). Adams, T., Budden, M., Hoare, C. et al (2004) ‘Lessons from the central Hampshire electronic health record pilot project: issues of data protection and consent’ British Medical Journal 328: 871. Admiral, P. (1996) ‘Voluntary euthanasia’ in S. McLean (ed.) Death Dying and the Law (Dartmouth). Adshead, G. (2003) ‘Commentary on Szasz’ Journal of Medical Ethics 29: 230. Advisory Group on the Ethics of Xenotransplantation (1996) Report (DoH).
    [Show full text]
  • The Involvement of Family in the Dutch Practice Of
    Roest et al. BMC Medical Ethics (2019) 20:23 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0361-2 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access The involvement of family in the Dutch practice of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide: a systematic mixed studies review Bernadette Roest* , Margo Trappenburg and Carlo Leget Abstract Background: Family members do not have an official position in the practice of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (EAS) in the Netherlands according to statutory regulations and related guidelines. However, recent empirical findings on the influence of family members on EAS decision-making raise practical and ethical questions. Therefore, the aim of this review is to explore how family members are involved in the Dutch practice of EAS according to empirical research, and to map out themes that could serve as a starting point for further empirical and ethical inquiry. Methods: A systematic mixed studies review was performed. The databases Pubmed, Embase, PsycInfo, and Emcare were searched to identify empirical studies describing any aspect of the involvement of family members before, during and after EAS in the Netherlands from 1980 till 2018. Thematic analysis was chosen as method to synthesize the quantitative and qualitative studies. Results: Sixty-six studies were identified. Only 14 studies had family members themselves as study participants. Four themes emerged from the thematic analysis. 1) Family-related reasons (not) to request EAS. 2) Roles and responsibilities of family members during EAS decision-making and performance. 3) Families’ experiences and grief after EAS. 4) Family and ‘the good euthanasia death’ according to Dutch physicians. Conclusion: Family members seem to be active participants in EAS decision-making, which goes hand in hand with ambivalent feelings and experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • A Minor's Right to Die with Dignity
    Katz: A Minor’s Right to Die with Dignity: The Ultimate Act of Love, Co Katz camera ready (Do Not Delete) 7/13/2018 3:19 PM A MINOR’S RIGHT TO DIE WITH DIGNITY: THE ULTIMATE ACT OF LOVE, COMPASSION, MERCY, AND CIVIL LIBERTY SYDNI KATZ* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 220 I. UNITED STATES CASE LAW REGARDING PHYSICIAN- ASSISTED SUICIDE FOR ADULTS ....................................... 222 II. RIGHT TO DIE IN OREGON, WASHINGTON, VERMONT, MONTANA, CALIFORNIA, AND COLORADO .......................................... 225 III. COMPETENCY, COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT, AND THE ACQUISITION OF DEATH ................................................... 229 IV. EXCEPTIONS TO THE PRESUMPTION AGE OF MAJORITY ........ 234 V. NETHERLANDS' AND BELGIUM’S RIGHT TO DIE LAWS ........... 238 A. Netherlands ................................................................. 238 B. Belgium ....................................................................... 240 VI. JUDICIAL DECISION MAKING TESTS AND AMENDMENTS TO PRESENT RIGHT TO DIE LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES ......................................................................................... 244 CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 246 * Sydni obtained her law degree from Nova Southeastern Shepard Broad College of Law in Davie, Florida graduating Cum Laude in May 2017. Sydni is an attorney at McClain DeWees PLLC and concentrates her practice on employment and family- based immigration.
    [Show full text]